Mathebula and Others v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Counsel and Others (JR283/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 524 (12 November 2024)

Mathebula and Others v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Counsel and Others (JR283/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 524 (12 November 2024)

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a reasonable and detailed explanation for the entire period of delay in filing the review application. The reasons advanced, including the closure of the union's offices and personal circumstances, were not sufficient or adequately explained for the full period. The applicants did not include a prayer for condonation in their notice of motion, and the confirmatory affidavits did not remedy the deficiencies in the founding affidavit. The court held that the applicants cannot rely on the negligence of their representatives and that, in the absence of a reasonable explanation for the delay, prospects of success are irrelevant. The...

Citation
[2024] ZALCJHB 524
Parties
Applicant: Sipho Mathebula; Applicant: Nyakallo Sambutana Monatisa; Applicant: Zoleka Charmaine Hlatswayo; Respondent: Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Counsel; Respondent: L Naidoo N.O.; Respondent: South African Police Service; Respondent: Provincial Commissioner: Gauteng
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 2024
Case Number
JR283/21
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Condonation Application for Late Filing of Review
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.
Judges
M T M Phehane
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Procedural Fairness, Late Filing, Onus of Explanation
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Procedural Fairness Late Filing Onus of Explanation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sipho Mathebula

Applicant

Nyakallo Sambutana Monatisa

Applicant

Zoleka Charmaine Hlatswayo

Applicant

Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Counsel

Respondent

L Naidoo N.O.

Respondent

South African Police Service

Respondent

Provincial Commissioner: Gauteng

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Condonation Application for Late Filing of Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for the delay is reasonable and covers the entire period of delay.
  3. 3 Whether prospects of success are relevant where no reasonable explanation for delay is provided.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a reasonable and detailed explanation for the entire period of delay in filing the review application. The reasons advanced, including the closure of the union's offices and personal circumstances, were not sufficient or adequately explained for the full period. The applicants did not include a prayer for condonation in their notice of motion, and the confirmatory affidavits did not remedy the deficiencies in the founding affidavit. The court held that the applicants cannot rely on the negligence of their representatives and that, in the absence of a reasonable explanation for the delay, prospects of success are irrelevant. The...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused with no order as to costs.